Chapter VI.

An answer to the twentieth chapter of the book entitled, “The
Universality of God’s Free Grace,” etc., being a collection of all the
arguments used by the author throughout the whole book to prove the
universality of redemption.

Thetitle pretends satisfaction to them who desire to have reason
satisfied: which, that it is a great undertaking, I easily grant; but for
the performance of it, “hic labor, hoc
opus.” That ever Christian reason, rightly informed by the word of
God, should be satisfied with any doctrine so discrepant from the
word, so full of contradiction in itself and to its own principles, as the
doctrine of universal redemption 369is, I should much marvel.
Therefore, I am persuaded that the author of the arguments following
(which, lest you should mistake them for others, he calleth
reasons) will fail of his intention with all that have so much
reason as to know how to make use of reason, and so much grace as not to
love darkness more than light. The only reason, as far as I can conceive,
why he calls this collection of all the arguments and texts of Scripture
which he had before cited and produced at large so many reasons,
being a supposal that he hath given them a logical, argumentative form in
this place, I shall briefly consider them; and, by the way, take notice of
his skill in a regular framing of arguments, to which here he evidently
pretends. His first reason, then, is as followeth:—

First, The proposition of this argument is clear, evident,
and acknowledged by all professing the name of Christ; but yet universally
with this caution and proviso, that by the Scripture affirming any
thing in plain words that is to be believed, you understand the plain
sense of those words, which is clear by rules of interpretation so to be.
It is the thing signified that is to be believed, and not the words only,
which are the sign thereof; and, therefore, the plain sense and
meaning is that which we must inquire after, and is intended when we
speak of believing plain words of the Scripture. But now if by plain
words you understand the literal importance of the words, which may
perhaps be figurative, or at least of various
signification, and capable of extension or restriction in the
interpretation, then there is nothing more false than this assertion; for
how can you then avoid the blasphemous folly of the Anthropomorphites,
assigning a body and human shape unto God, the plain words of the
Scripture often mentioning his eyes, hands, ears, etc., it being
apparent to every child that the true importance of those expressions
answers not at all their gross carnal conception? Will not also
transubstantiation, or its younger brother consubstantiation, be an article
of our creed? With this limitation, then, we pass the proposition, with
the places of Scripture brought to confirm it; only with this observation,
that there is not one of them to the purpose in hand, — which, because they
do not relate to the argument in consideration, we only leave to men’s
silent judgments.

Secondly, The assumption, or minor proposition, we
absolutely deny as to some part of it; as that Christ should be said to
give himself 370a ransom for every man, it being neither often,
nor once, nor plainly, nor obscurely affirmed in the Scripture, nor at all
proved in the place referred unto: so that this is but an empty
flourishing. For the other expression, of “tasting
death for every man,” we grant that the words are found
Heb. ii. 9; but we deny that every
man doth always necessarily signify all and every man in the
world. Νουθετοῦντες πάντα ἄνθρωπον, καὶ
διδάσκοντες πάντα ἄνθρωπον, Col. i. 28, —
“Warning every man, and
teaching every man.” Every man is not there every man
in the world; neither are we to believe that Paul warned and taught every
particular man, for it is false and impossible. So that every
man, in the Scripture, is not universally collective of all of all
sorts, but either distributive, for some of all sorts, or collective, with
a restriction to all of some sort; as in that of Paul, every man,
was only of those to whom he had preached the gospel. Secondly, In the
original there is only ὑπὲρ παντός,
for every, without the substantive man, which might be
supplied by other words as well as man, — as elect, or
believer.

Thirdly, That every one is there clearly
restrained to all the members of Christ, and the children by him brought to
glory, we have before declared. So that this place is no way useful for
the confirmation of the assumption, which we deny in the sense intended;
and are sure we shall never see a clear, or so much as a probable,
testimony for the confirming of it.

To the conclusion of the syllogism, the author, to manifest
his skill in disputing in such an argumentative way as he undertaketh,
addeth some farther proofs. Conscious, it seems, he was to himself that it
had little strength from the propositions from which it is enforced; and,
therefore, thought to give some new supportments to it, although with very
ill success, as will easily appear to any one that shall but consult the
places quoted, and consider the business in hand. In the meantime, this
new logic, of filing proofs to the conclusion which are suitable to neither
proposition, and striving to give strength to that by new testimony which
it hath not from the premises, deserves our notice in this age of learned
writers. “Heu quantum est sapere.”
Such logic is fit to maintain such divinity. And so much for the first
argument.

“Therefore, Jesus Christ came to save, died, and gave
himself a ransom for all men, and is the propitiation for their sins,
John i. 29.”

To the proposition of this argument I desire only to
observe, that we do not affirm that the Scripture doth, in any place, lay
an exception or restraint upon those persons for whom Christ is said to
die, as though in one place it should be affirmed he died for all men, and
in another some exception against it, as though some of those all
men were excluded, — which were to feign a repugnancy and
contradiction in the word of God; only, we say, one place of Scripture
interprets another, and declares that sense which before in one place was
ambiguous and doubtful. For instance: when the Scripture showeth that
Christ died or gave himself a ransom for all, we believe it; and
when, in another place, he declares that all to be his
church, his elect, his sheep, all
believers, — some of all sorts, out of all kindreds, and
nations, and tongues, under heaven; this is not to lay an exception or
restraint upon what was said of all before, but only to declare
that the all for which he gave himself for a ransom were all his
church, all his elect, all his sheep, some of all sorts: and so we believe
that he died for all. With this observation we let pass the proposition,
taking out its meaning as well as the phrase whereby it is expressed will
afford it, together with the vain flourish and pompous show of many texts
of Scripture brought to confirm it, whereof not one is any thing to the
purpose; so that I am persuaded he put down names and figures at a venture,
without once consulting the texts, having no small cause to be confident
that none would trace him in his flourish, and yet that some eyes might
dazzle at his supernumerary quotations. Let me desire the reader to turn
to those places, and if any one of them be any thing to the purpose or
business in hand, let the author’s credit be of weight with him another
time. O let us not be as many, who corrupt the word of God! But perhaps
it is a mistake in the impression, and for Matt. xxvi.
24, he intends verse 28,
where Christ is said to shed his blood for many. In John vi., he mistook
verse 38 for 39,
where our Saviour affirms that he came to save that which his Father gave
him, — that none should be lost; which certainly are the elect. In
1 Cor. xv. 3, 4, he was not much
amiss, the apostle conjoining in those verses the death and resurrection of
Christ, which he saith was for us; and how far this advantageth his cause
in hand, we have before declared. By Heb. x. 7, I
suppose he meant verse 10 of the chapter, affirming
that by the will of God, which Christ came to do, we are sanctified, even
372through the offering of the body of Jesus, — ascribing our
sanctification to his death, which is not effected in all and every one;
though perhaps he may suppose the last clause of the verse, “once for all,” to make for him. But some
charitable man, I hope, will undeceive him, by letting him know the meaning
of the word ἐφάπαξ. The like may be
observed of the other places, — that in them is nothing at all to the
proposition in hand, and nigh them at least is enough to evert it. And so
his proposition in sum is:— “All those for whom the Scripture affirms that
Christ did die, for them he died;” which is true, and doubtless
granted.

The assumption affirms that Christ and his apostles in the
Scriptures say that he died to save sinners, unjust,
ungodly, the world, all; whereupon the
conclusion ought barely to be, “Therefore Christ died for sinners, unjust,
ungodly, the world, and the like.” To which we say, — First, That this is
the very same argument, for substance, with that which went before, as also
are some of those that follow; only some words are varied, to change the
outward appearance, and so to make show of a number. Secondly, That the
whole strength of this argument lies in turning indefinite propositions
into universals, concluding that because Christ died for sinners, therefore
he died for all sinners; because he died for the unjust, ungodly, and the
world, that therefore he died for every one that is unjust, or ungodly, and
for every one in the world; because he died for all, therefore for all and
every one of all sorts of men. Now, if this be good arguing, I will
furnish you with some more such arguments against you have occasion to use
them:— First, God “justifieth the ungodly,” Rom. iv. 5;
therefore, he justifieth every one that is ungodly. Now, “whom he justifieth, them he also
glorifieth;” and therefore every ungodly person shall be
glorified. Secondly, When Christ came, “men loved darkness rather than light,” John iii. 19; therefore, all men did
so, and so none believed. Thirdly, “The
world knew not Christ,” John i. 10;
therefore, no man in the world knew him. Fourthly, “The whole world lieth in
wickedness,” 1 John v.
19; therefore, every one in the world doth so. Such arguments
as these, by turning indefinite propositions into universals, I could
easily furnish you withal, for any purpose that you will use them to.
Thirdly, If you extend the words in the conclusion no farther than the
intention of them in the places of Scripture recited in the assumption, we
may safely grant the whole, — namely, that Christ died for sinners and the
world, for sinful men in their several generations living therein; but if
you intend a universality collective of all in the conclusion, then the
syllogism is sophistical and false, no place of Scripture affirming so much
that is produced, the assignation of the object of the death of Christ in
them being in terms indefinite, receiving light and clearness for a more
restrained sense in those places where they are expounded to 373be meant of all his own people, and the children of God scattered
throughout the world. Fourthly, For particular places of Scripture urged,
1 Tim. i. 15; 1 Pet.
iii. 18; Rom. v. 6, in the beginning of the
assumption, are not at all to the purpose in hand. John iii.
17; Heb. ii. 9; 1 John ii.
2, have been already considered. Rom. iii. 10,
19, 20, 23; Eph. ii.
1–3; Tit. iii. 3; John iii. 4, 6, added
in the close of the same proposition, prove that all are sinners and
children of wrath; but of Christ’s dying for all sinners, or for all those
children of wrath, there is not the least intimation. And this may suffice
in answer to the first two arguments, which might easily be retorted upon
the author of them, the Scripture being full and plain to the confirmation
of the position which he intends to oppose.

III. “That which the Scripture layeth forth as one end of
the death of Christ, and one ground and cause of God’s exalting Christ to
be the Lord and Judge of all, and of the equity of his judging, that is
certainly to be believed, Ps. xii. 6,
xviii. 130, cxix. 4;

“Therefore, that Christ so died, and rose again for all, is
a truth to be believed, 1 Tim. ii.
6”

First, The unlearned framing of this argument, the uncouth
expressions of the thing intended, and failing in particulars, by the by,
being to be ascribed to the person and not the cause, I shall not much
trouble myself withal; as, — First, To his artificial regularity in
bring his minor proposition, namely, Christ being made Lord and Judge of
all, into the major; so continuing one term in all three propositions, and
making the whole almost unintelligible. Secondly, His interpreting,
“For this cause God exalted Christ,” to be his death and resurrection, when
his resurrection, wherein he was “declared
to be the Son of God with power,” Rom. i. 4, was
a glorious part of his exaltation. To examine and lay open the weakness
and folly of innumerable such things as these, which everywhere occur, were
to be lavish of precious moments. Those that have the least taste of
learning or the way of reasoning do easily see their vanity; and for the
rest, especially the poor admirers of these foggy sophisms, I shall not
say, “Quoniam hic populus vult decipi,
decipiatur,” but, “God give them understanding and repentance, to
the acknowledgment of the truth.”

Secondly, To this whole argument, as it lies before us, I
have nothing to say but only to entreat Mr
More, that if the misery of 374our times should be calling
upon him to be writing again, he would cease expressing his mind by
syllogisms, and speak in his own manner; which, by its confusion in
innumerable tautologies, may a little puzzle his reader. For, truly, this
kind of arguing here used, — for want of logic, whereby he is himself
deceived, and delight in sophistry, whereby he deceiveth others, — is
exceedingly ridiculous; for none can be so blind but that, at first reading
of the argument, he will see that he asserts and infers that in the
conclusion, strengthening it with a new testimony, which was not once
dreamed of in either of the premises; they speaking of the exaltation of
Christ to be judge of all, which refers to his own glory; the conclusion,
of his dying for all, which necessarily aims at and intends their good.
Were it not a noble design to banish all human learning, and to establish
such a way of arguing in the room thereof? “Hoc Ithacus velit et magno mercentur Atridæ.”

Thirdly, The force and sum of the argument is this:— Christ
died and rose again that he might be Lord and Judge of all; therefore,
Christ died for all.” Now, ask what he means by dying for all, and the
whole treatise answers that it is a paying a ransom for them all, that they
might be saved. Now, how this can be extorted out of Christ’s dominion
over all, with his power of judging all committed to him, which also is
extended to the angels for whom he died not, let them that can understand
it rejoice in their quick apprehension; I confess it flies my thoughts.

Fourthly, The manner of arguing being so vain, let us see a
little whether there be any more weight in the matter of the argument.
Many texts of Scripture are heaped up and distributed to the several
propositions. In those out of Ps. xii. 6, xviii. 30
(as I suppose it should be, not 130, as it is printed), cxix. 4, there is some mention of the
precepts of God, with the purity of his word and perfection of his word;
which that they are any thing to the business in hand I cannot perceive.
That of 2 Tim. ii. 6, added to the conclusion,
is one of those places which are brought forth upon every occasion, as
being the supposed foundation of the whole assertion, but causelessly, as
hath been showed oft. [Among] those which are annexed to the minor
proposition, [is] 2 Cor. v.
14, 15: as I have already cleared the mind of the Holy Ghost in
it, and made it manifest that no such thing as universal redemption can be
wrested from it, so unto this present argument it hath no reference at all,
not containing any one syllable concerning the judging of Christ and his
power over all, which was the medium insisted on. Phil. ii. 7–11; Acts xvii. 31; Rom. ii. 16, mention, indeed, Christ’s
exaltation, and his judging all at the last day; but because he shall judge
all at the last day, therefore he died for all, will ask more pains to
prove than our adversary intends to take in this cause.

375The weight, on the whole, must depend on
Rom. xiv. 9, 11,
12; which being the only place that gives any colour to this
kind of arguing, shall a little be considered. It is the lordship and
dominion of Christ over all which the apostle, in that place, at large
insists on and evidenceth to believers, that they might thereby be provoked
to walk blameless, and without offence one towards another, knowing the
terror of the Lord, and how that all men, even themselves and others, must
come to appear before his judgment-seat, when it will be but a sad thing to
have an account to make of scandals and offences. Farther to ingraft and
fasten this upon them, he declares unto them the way whereby the Lord
Christ attained and came to this dominion and power of judging, all things
being put under his feet, together with what design he had, as to this
particular, in undertaking the office of mediation, there expressed by
“dying, rising, and
reviving,” — to wit, that he might have the execution of
judging over all committed to him, that being part of the “glory set before him,” which caused him to
“endure the cross and despise
the shame,” Heb. xii.
2.

So that all which here is intimated concerning the death of
Christ is about the end, effects, and issue that it had towards himself,
not any thing of what was his intention towards them for whom he died. To
die for others does at least denote to die for their good, and in the
Scripture always to die in their stead. Now, that any such thing can be
hence deducted as that Christ died for all, because by his death himself
made way for the enjoyment of that power whereby he is Lord over all, and
will judge them all, casting the greatest part of men into hell by the
sentence of his righteous judgment, I profess sincerely that I am no way
able to perceive. If men will contend and have it so, that Christ must be
said to die for all, because by his death and resurrection he attained the
power of judging all, then I shall only leave with them these three
things:— First, That innumerable souls shall be judged by him for
not walking according to the light of nature left unto them, directing them
to seek after the eternal power and Godhead of their Creator, without the
least rumour of the gospel to direct them to a Redeemer once arriving at
their ears, Rom. ii. 12; and what good will it be
for such that Christ so died for them? Secondly, That he also died
for the devils, because he hath, by his death and resurrection, attained a
power of judging them also. Thirdly, That the whole assertion is
nothing to the business in hand; our inquiry being about them whom our
Saviour intended to redeem and save by his blood; this return, about those
he will one day judge: “quæstio est de
alliis, responsio de cepis.”

IV. “That which the Scripture so sets forth in general for
the world of mankind, as a truth for them all, that whosoever of the
particulars so believe as to come to Christ and receive the same shall 376not perish, but have everlasting life, is certainly a truth to be
believed, Acts v. 20;

“But that God sent forth his Son to be the Saviour of the
world is in Scripture so set forth in general for all men, that whosoever
of the particulars so believe as they come to Christ and receive the same,
they shall not perish, but have everlasting life, John
iii. 16–18, 36, i. 4, 11, 12:

“Therefore, that God sent his Son to be the Saviour of the
world is a certain truth, 1 John iv.
14.”

I hope no ingenuous man, that knows any thing of the
controversy in hand, and to what head it is driven between us and our
adversary, or is in any measure acquainted with the way of arguing, will
expect that we should spend many words about such poor flourishes, vain
repetitions, confused expressions, and illogical deductions and
argumentations, as this pretended new argument (indeed the same with the
first two, and with almost all that follow), will expect that I should cast
away much time or pains about them. For my own part, I were no way able to
undergo the tediousness of the review of such things as these, but that
“eundum est quo trahunt fata
ecclesiæ.” Not, then, any more to trouble the reader with a
declaration of that in particulars which he cannot but be sufficiently
convinced of by a bare overlooking of these reasons, — namely, that this
author is utterly ignorant of the way of reasoning, and knows not how
tolerably to express his own conceptions, nor to infer one thing from
another in any regular way, I answer, — First, That whatsoever the
Scripture holds forth as a truth to be believed is certainly so, and to be
embraced. Secondly, That the Scripture sets forth the death of Christ, to
all whom the gospel is preached [unto], as an all-sufficient means for the
bringing of sinners unto God, so as that whosoever believe it and come in
unto him shall certainly be saved. Thirdly, What can be concluded hence,
but that the death of Christ is of such infinite value as that it is able
to save to the utmost every one to whom it is made known, if by true faith
they obtain an interest therein and a right thereunto, we cannot perceive.
This truth we have formerly confirmed by many testimonies of Scripture, and
do conceive that this innate sufficiency of the death of Christ is the
foundation of its promiscuous proposal to elect and reprobate. Fourthly,
That the conclusion, if he would have the reason to have any colour or show
of an argument, should at least include and express the whole and entire
assertion contained in the proposition, — namely, “That Christ is so set
forth to be the Saviour of the world, that whosoever of the particulars
believe,” etc. And then it is by us fully granted, as making nothing at
all for the universality of redemption, but only for the fulness and
sufficiency of his satisfaction. Of the word world enough hath
been said before.

V. “That which God will one day cause every man confess to
the 377glory of God is certainly a truth, for God will own no lie
for his glory, John iii. 33; Rom.
iii. 3, 4;

“Therefore, it is certainly a truth that Jesus Christ hath
given himself a ransom for all men, and hath thereby the right of lordship
over them; and if any will not believe and come into this government, yet
he abideth faithful, and cannot deny himself, but will one day bring them
before him, and cause them to confess him Lord, to the glory of God; when
they shall be denied by him, for denying him in the days of his patience,
2 Tim. ii. 12–14; Matt. x. 32, 33; 2 Cor. v. 10.”

Ans. The conclusion of this argument ought to be
thus, and no otherwise, if you intend it should receive any strength from
the promises: “Therefore, that Jesus Christ is the Lord, and to be
confessed to the glory of God, is certainly a truth.” This, I say, is all
the conclusion that this argument ought to have had, unless, instead of a
syllogism, you intend three independent propositions, every one standing
upon its own strength. That which is inserted concerning his giving
himself a ransom for all, and that which follows of the conviction and
condemnation of them who believe not nor obey the gospel, confirmed from
2 Cor. v. 10, 2 Tim. ii. 12–14, is altogether
heterogeneous to the business in hand. Now, this being the conclusion
intended, if our author suppose that the deniers of universal redemption do
question the truth of it, I wonder not at all why he left all other
employment to fall a-writing controversies, having such apparent advantages
against his adversaries as such small mistakes as this are able to furnish
his conceit withal. But it may be an act of charity to part him and his
own shadow, — so terribly at variance as here and in other places;
wherefore, I beseech him to hear a word in his heat, and to take notice, —
[First,] That though we do not ascribe a fruitless, ineffectual redemption
to Jesus Christ, nor say that he loved any with that entire love which
moved him to lay down his life, but his own church, and that all his elect
are effectually redeemed by him, yet we deny not but that he shall also
judge the reprobates, — namely, even all them that know not, that deny,
that disobey and corrupt the truth of his gospel, — and that all shall be
convinced that he is Lord of all at the last day: so that he may spare his
pains of proving such unquestionable things. Something else is extremely
desirous to follow, but indignation must be bridled. Secondly, For that
cause in the second proposition, “By virtue of his death and ransom given,”
we deny that it is anywhere in the Scripture once intimated that the ransom
paid by Christ in his death for us was the cause of his exaltation to be
Lord 378of all: it was his obedience to his Father in his death,
and not his satisfaction for us, that is proposed as the antecedent of this
exaltation; as is apparent, Phil. ii.
7–11.

VI. “That which may be proved in and by the Scripture, both
by plain sentences therein and necessary consequences imported thereby,
without wresting, wrangling, adding to, taking from, or altering the
sentences and words of Scripture, is a truth to be believed, Matt. xxii. 29,
32; Rom.
xi. 2, 5, 6;

“But that Jesus Christ gave himself a ransom for all men,
and by the grace of God tasted death for every man, may be proved in and by
the Scripture, both by plain sentences therein and necessary consequences
imported thereby, without wresting, wrangling, adding, or taking away, or
altering the words and sentences, as is already showed, chap. vii., xiii.,
which will be now ordered into several proofs:

Ans. First, The meaning of this argument is, that
universal redemption may be proved by the Scripture; which, being the very
thing in question, and the thesis undertaken to be proved, there is no
reason why itself should make an argument, but only to make up a number:
and, for my part, they should pass without any other answer, namely, that
they are a number, but that those who are the number are to be
considered.

Secondly, Concerning the argument itself (seeing it must go
for one), we say, — First, To the first proposition, that laying
aside the unnecessary expressions, the meaning of it I take to be this:
“That which is affirmed in the Scripture, or may be deduced from thence by
just consequence, following such ways of interpretation, of affirmation,
and consequences, as by which the Spirit of God leadeth us into the
knowledge of the truth, is certainly to be believed;” which is granted of
all, though not proved by the places he quoteth, Matt. xxii. 29,
32, Rom.
xi. 2, 5, 6, and is the only foundation of that article of faith
which you seek to oppose. Secondly, To the second, that Christ gave
himself a ransom ὑπὲρ πάντων, for all,
and tasted death ὑπὲρ παντός, for all,
is the very word of Scripture, and was never denied by any. The making of
all to be all men and every man, in both the places aimed at, is
your addition, and not the Scripture’s assertion. If you intend, then, to
prove that Christ gave himself a ransom for all, and tasted death for all,
you may save your labours; it is confessed on all hands, none ever denied
it. But if you intend to prove those all to be all and every man,
of all ages and kinds, elect and reprobate, and not all his children, all
his elect, all his sheep, all his people, all the children given him of
God, — some of all sorts, nations, tongues, and languages only, I will, by
the Lord’s assistance, willingly join issue with you, or 379any
man breathing, to search out the meaning of the word and mind of God in it;
holding ourselves to the proportion of faith, essentiality of the doctrine
of redemption, scope of the places where such assertions are, comparing
them with other places, and the like ways, — labouring in all humility to
find the mind of the Lord, according to his own appointment. And of the
success of such a trial, laying aside such failings as will adhere to my
personal weakness, I am, by the grace of God, exceedingly confident;
having, by his goodness, received some strength and opportunity to search
into and seriously to weigh whatever the most famous assertors of universal
redemption, whether Lutherans or Arminians, have been able to say in this
cause. For the present, I address myself to what is before me; only
desiring the reader to observe, that the assertion to be proved is, “That
Jesus Christ, according to the counsel and will of his Father, suitable to
his purpose of salvation in his own mind and intention, did, by his death
and oblation, pay a ransom for all and every man, elect and reprobate, —
both those that are saved and those that perish, — to redeem them from sin,
death, and hell, [and] to recover salvation, life, and immortality for
them; and not only for his elect, or church, chosen to an inheritance
before the foundation of the world.” To confirm this we have divers places
produced; which, by the Lord’s assistance, we shall consider in order.

Proof 1 of argument 6. “God so loved the
world, that he gave his Son to be the Saviour of the world, 1 John iv. 14; and sends his servant
to bear witness of his Son, that all men through him might believe,
John i. 4, 7; that
whosoever believes on him might have everlasting life, John iii. 16, 17. And he is willing
that all should come to the knowledge of the truth, 1 Tim. ii.
4, and be saved, 1 Tim. i.
15. Nor will he be wanting in the sufficiency of helpfulness to
them, if, as light comes, they will suffer themselves to be wrought on and
to receive it, Prov. i. 23, viii. 4,
5. And is not this plain in Scripture?”

Ans. First, The main, yea, indeed, only thing to be
proved, as we before observed, is, that these indefinite propositions which
we find in the Scripture concerning the death of Christ are to be
understood universally, — that the terms all and world do
signify in this business, when they denote the object of the death of
Christ, all and every man in the world. Unless this be done, all other
labour is altogether useless and fruitless. Now, to this there is nothing
at all urged in this pretended proof, but only a few ambiguous places
barely recited, with a false collection from them or observation upon them,
which they give no colour to.

Secondly, 1 John iv.
14, God’s sending his Son to be the “Saviour of the world,” and his servant to testify
it, is nothing but to be the Saviour of men living in the world; which his
elect are. A 380hundred such places as these, so clearly
interpreted as they are in other places, would make naught at all to the
purpose. The next thing is from John i. 4, 7.
Verse 4 is, that Christ was the
“life of men;” which
is most true, no life being to be had for any man but only in and through
him. This not being at all to the question, the next words of verse 7 [are], “That all men through him might believe;”
which words being thrust in, to piece-up a sense with another fraction of
Scripture, seem to have some weight, as though Christ were sent that all
men through him might believe. A goodly show! seeming no less to make for
universal redemption than the Scripture cited by the devil, after he had
cut off part of it, did for our Saviour’s casting himself from the pinnacle
of the temple. But if you cast aside the sophistry of the old serpent, the
expression of this place is not a little available to invalidate the thesis
sought to be maintained by it. The words are, “There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the light, that all men
through him might believe.” Now, who do you think is there
meant by δι’ αὐτοῦ, “through him?” Is it Christ, think you, the
light? or John, the witness of the light? Certainly John, as almost all
expositors do agree, except certain among the Papists, and Grotius, — that Ishmael. So the Syriac
interpreter, reading, “By his hand or ministry.” So the word infers; for
we are not said to believe διὰ
Χρίστου, “by Christ,” or, as it should be here, διὰ τοῦ φωτός, “by the light;” but εἰς τὸ φῶς, John xii.
36, “in the light,” not by it. And ἐπι τὸν Κύριον, Acts ix.
42, “believed in the
Lord;” so also, Rom. ix. 33,
Καὶ πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων ἐπ’ αὐτῷ,
“Every one that believeth on
him.” So ἐν Χριστῷ, in
divers places, in him; but no mention of believing by
him, which rather denotes the instrument of believing, as is the
ministry of the word, than the object of faith, as Christ is. This being
apparent, let us see what is affirmed of John, why he was sent “that all through him might believe.” Now,
this word all here hath all the qualifications which our author
requireth for it, to be always esteemed a certain expression of a
collective universality, that it is spoken of God, etc. And who, I pray
you, were these all, that were intended to be brought to the faith
by the ministry of John? Were they not only all those that lived
throughout the world in his days, who preached (a few years) in Judea only,
but also all those that were dead before his nativity, and that were born
after his death, and shall be to the end of the world in any place under
heaven? Let them that can believe it enjoy their persuasion, with this
assurance that I will never be their rival; being fully persuaded that by
all men here is meant only some of all sorts, to whom his word did
come. So that the necessary sense of the word all here is wholly
destructive to the proposition.

For what, thirdly, is urged from John iii. 16, 17, that God so 381sent his Son, that “whosoever believeth on him might have everlasting life,” as
far as I know is not under debate, as to the sense of it, among
Christians.

Fourthly, For God’s willingness that all should be saved,
from 1 Tim. ii. 4 (to which a word is
needlessly added to make a show, the text being quite to another purpose,
from 1 Tim. i. 15), taking all
men there for the universality of individuals, then I ask, —
First, What act it is of God wherein this his willingness doth
consist? Is it in the eternal purpose of his will that all should be
saved? Why is it not accomplished? “Who
hath resisted his will?” Is it in an antecedent desire that it
should be so, though he fail in the end? Then is the blessed God most
miserable, it being not in him to accomplish his just and holy desires. Is
it some temporary act of his, whereby he hath declared himself unto them?
Then, I say, Grant that salvation is only to be had in a Redeemer, in Jesus
Christ, and give me an instance how God, in any act whatsoever, hath
declared his mind and revealed himself to all men, of all times and places,
concerning his willingness of their salvation by Jesus Christ, a Redeemer,
and I will never more trouble you in this cause. Secondly, Doth
this will equally respect the all intended, or doth it not? If it
doth, why hath it not equal effects towards all? what reason can be
assigned? If it doth not, whence shall that appear? There is nothing in
the text to intimate any such diversity. For our parts, by all
men we understand some of all sorts throughout the world, not doubting
but that, to the equal reader, we have made it so appear from the context
and circumstances of the place, the will of God there being that mentioned
by our Saviour, John vi. 40. That which follows in
the close of this proof, of God’s “not being wanting in the sufficiency of
helpfulness to them who, as light comes, suffer themselves to be wrought
upon and receive it,” is a poisonous sting in the tail of the serpent,
wherein is couched the whole Pelagian poison of free-will and Popish merit
of congruity, with Arminian sufficient grace, in its whole extent and
universality; to neither of which there is the least witness given in the
place produced.

The sum and meaning of the whole assertion is, that there
is a universality of sufficient grace granted to all, even of grace
subjective, enabling them to obedience, which receives addition, increase,
degrees, and augmentation, according as they who have it do make use of
what they presently enjoy; which is a position so contradictory to
innumerable places of Scripture, so derogatory to the free grace of God, so
destructive to the efficacy of it, such a clear exaltation of the old idol
free-will into the throne of God, as any thing that the decaying estate of
Christianity hath invented and broached. So far is it from being “plain
and clear in Scripture,” that it is universally repugnant to the whole
dispensation of the new covenant revealed 382to us therein;
which, if ever the Lord call me to, I hope very clearly to demonstrate: for
the present, it belongs not immediately to the business in hand, and
therefore I leave it, coming to —

Ans. Those places of this proof where there is
mention of all or world, as John xii. 47, i.
29; 2 Cor. v.
14, 15; 1 Tim. ii. 6;
2 Cor. v. 19; 1 John ii.
2, have been all already considered, and I am unwilling to
trouble the reader with repetitions. See the places, and I doubt not but
you will find that they are so far from giving any strength to the thing
intended to be proved by him, that they much rather evert it. For the
rest, 1 Tim. i. 15; Matt. xviii. 11; 1 John iii. 5, 8,
how any thing can be extracted from them to give colour to the universality
of redemption I cannot see; what they make against it hath been declared.
Pass we then to —

Proof 3. “God in Christ doth, in some means or other
of his appointment, give some witness to all men of his mercy and goodness
procured by Christ, Ps. xix. 4; Rom. x.
18; Acts xiv. 17; and there-through, at
one time or other, sendeth forth some stirrings of his Spirit, to move in
and knock at the hearts of men, to invite them to repentance and seeking
God, and so to lay hold on the grace and salvation offered: and this not in
a show or pretence, but in truth and good-will, ready to bestow it on them.
And this is all fully testified in Scripture, Gen. vi. 3;
Isa. xlv. 22; Acts xvii. 30, 31; John i. 19.”

Ans. First, “Parvas
habet spes Troja, si tales habet.” If the universality of
redemption have need of such proofs as these, it hath indeed great need and
little hope of supportment. Universal vocation is here asserted,
to maintain universal redemption. “Manus manum fricat,” or rather, “Muli se mutuo scabiunt;” this being called in
oftentimes to support the other; and they are both the two legs of that
idol free-will, which is set up for men to worship, and when one stumbles
the other steps forward to uphold the Babel. Of universal
vocation (a gross figment) I shall not now treat; but only say, for
the present, that it is true that God at all times, ever since the
creation, hath called men to the knowledge of himself as the great Creator,
in those things which of him, by the means of the visible creation, might
be known, “even his eternal power and
Godhead,” Rom. i. 19,
20; Ps. xix. 1,
2; Acts xiv. 17. Secondly, That after
the death of Christ, he did, by preaching of the gospel extended far and
wide, 383call home to himself the children of God, scattered
abroad in the world, whereas his elect were before confined almost to one
nation; giving a right to the gospel to be preached to “every
creature,” Mark xvi.
15; Rom. x. 18; Isa. xlv.
22; Acts
xvii. 30, 31. But, thirdly, That God should at all times, in
all places, in all ages, grant means of grace or call to Christ as a
redeemer, or to a participation of his mercy and goodness in him
manifested, with strivings and motions of his Spirit for men to close with
those invitations, is so gross and groundless an imagination, so opposite
to God’s distinguishing mercy, so contradictory to express places of
Scripture and the experience of all ages, as I wonder how any man hath the
boldness to assert it, much more to produce it as a proof of an untruth
more gross than itself. Were I not resolved to tie myself to the present
controversy, I should not hold from producing some reasons to evert this
fancy; something may be done hereafter, if the Lord prevent not. In the
meantime, let the reader consult Ps.
cxlvii. 19, 20; Matt. xi. 25, xxii.
14; Acts xiv. 16, xvi.
7; Rom. x.
14, 15. We pass to —

Proof 4. “The Holy Ghost, that cometh from the
Father and the Son, shall reprove the world of sin (even that part of the
world that refuseth now to believe that they are under sin), because they
believe not on Christ, and that it is their sin that they have not believed
on him. And how could it be their sin not to believe in Christ, and they
for that cause under sin, if there were neither enough in the atonement
made by Christ for them, nor truth in God’s offer of mercy to them, nor
will nor power in the Spirit’s moving in any sort sufficient to have
brought them to believe, at one time or other? And yet is this evident in
Scripture, and shall be by the Holy Spirit, to be their great sin, that
fastens all other sins on them, John
iii. 18, 19, viii. 24, xii. 48, xv. 22, 24, xvi. 7–11.”

Ans. The intention of this proof is, to show that
men shall be condemned for their unbelief, for not believing in Christ;
which, saith the author, cannot be unless three things be granted, — First,
That there be enough in the atonement made by Christ for them. Secondly,
That there be truth in God’s offer of mercy to them. Thirdly, That there
be sufficient will and power given them by the Spirit, at some time or
other, to believe. Now, though I believe no man can perceive what may be
concluded hence for the universality of redemption, yet I shall observe
some few things: and to the first thing required do say, That if, by
“Enough in the atonement for them,” you understand that the atonement,
which was made for them, hath enough in it, we deny it; not because the
atonement hath not enough in it for them, but because the atonement was not
for them. If you mean that there is a sufficiency in the merit of Christ
to save them if they should believe, we grant it, and affirm that this
sufficiency is the chief ground of the proposing it unto them
(understanding those 384to whom it is proposed, that is those to
whom the gospel is preached). To the second, That there is truth, as in
all the ways and words of God, so in his offer of mercy to whomsoever it is
offered. If we take the command to believe, with the promise of life upon
so doing, for an offer of mercy, there is an eternal truth in it; which is,
that God will assuredly bestow life and salvation upon all believers, the
proffers being immediately declarative of our duty; secondly, of the
concatenation of faith and life, and not at all of God’s intention towards
the particular soul to whom the proffer is made: “For who hath known the mind of the Lord, and who hath been his
counsellor?” To the third, the Spirit’s giving will or power,
I say, — First, That ye set the cart before the horse, placing will
before power. Secondly, I deny that any internal assistance is
required to render a man inexcusable for not believing, if he have the
object of faith propounded to him, though of himself he have neither power
nor will so to do, having lost both in Adam. Thirdly, How a man may
have given him a will to believe, and yet not believe, I pray, declare the
next controversy ye undertake. This being observed, I shall take leave to
put this proof into such form as alone it is capable of, that the strength
thereof may appear, and it is this: “If the Spirit shall convince all those
of sin to whom the gospel is preached, that do not believe, then Christ
died for all men, both those that have the gospel preached unto them and
those that have not; but the first is true, for their unbelief is their
great sin: ergo, Jesus Christ
died for all.” Which, if any, is an argument “a baculo ad angulum,” “from the beam to the
shuttle.” The places of Scripture, John
iii. 18, 19, viii. 24, xii. 48, xv. 22, 24, prove that unbelief
is a soul-condemning sin, and that for which they shall be condemned in
whom it is privative, by their having the gospel preached to them. But
quid ad nos?

One place is more urged, and consequently more abused, than
the rest, and therefore must be a little cleared; it is John xvi. 7–11. The words are,
“I will send the
Comforter to you. And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin,
and of righteousness, and of judgment: of sin, because they believe not in
me; of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; of
judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.” First,
It is uncertain whether our author understands the words of the Spirit in
and with Christ at the last day, or in and with the ministry of the word
now in the days of the gospel. If the first, he is foully mistaken; if the
latter, then the conviction here meant intends only those to whom the
gospel is preached, — and what that will advantage universal redemption,
which compriseth all as well before as after the death of Christ, I know
not. But, secondly, It is uncertain whether he supposeth this conviction
of the Spirit to attend the preaching of the 385gospel only, or
else to consist in strivings and motions even in them who never hear the
word of the gospel; if he mean the latter, we wait for a proof. Thirdly,
It is uncertain whether he supposeth those thus convinced to be converted
and brought to the faith by that conviction and that attending
effectualness of grace, or no.

But omitting those things, that text being brought forth
and insisted on, farther to manifest how little reason there was for its
producing, I shall briefly open the meaning of the words. Our Saviour
Christ intending, in this his last sermon, to comfort his apostles in their
present sad condition, whereto they were brought by his telling them that
he must leave them and go to his Father, — which sorrow and sadness he knew
full well would be much increased when they should behold the vile,
ignominious way whereby their Lord and Master should be taken from them,
with all those reproaches and persecutions which would attend them so
deprived of him, — bids them not be troubled, nor filled with sorrow and
fear, for all this; assuring them that all this loss, shame, and reproach
should be abundantly made up by what he would do for them and bestow upon
them when his bodily presence should be removed from them. And as to that
particular, which was the head of all, that he should be so vilely rejected
and taken out of the world as a false teacher and seducer, he telleth them
he will send them ἄλλον παράκλητον,
John xiv. 16, “another
Comforter,” one that shall “vicariam navare operam,” as Tertul., — be unto them in his stead, to fill
them with all that consolation whereof by his absence they might be
deprived; and not only so, but also to be present with them in other
greater things than any he had as yet employed them about. This again he
puts them in mind of, chap. xvi.
7. Now, ὁ παράκλητος, who
is there promised, is properly “an advocate,” — that is, one that pleadeth
the cause of a person that is guilty or accused before any tribunal, — and
is opposed τῷ κατηγόρῳ, Rev. xii. 10; and so is this word by
us translated, 1 John ii. 1. Christ, then, here
telleth them, that as he will be their advocate with the Father, so he will
send them an advocate to plead his cause, which they professed, with the
world; that is, those men in the world, which had so vilely traduced and
condemned him as a seducer, laying it as a reproach upon all his followers.
This, doubtless, though in some respect it be continued to all ages in the
ministry of the word, yet it principally intended the plentiful effusion of
the Spirit upon the apostles at Pentecost, after the ascension of our
Saviour; which also is made more apparent by the consideration of what he
affirmeth that the advocate so sent shall do, namely, — 1. “He shall reprove,” or rather, evidently,
“convince, the world of
sin, because they believed not on him;” which, surely, he
abundantly did in that sermon of Peter, Acts ii., when
the enemies themselves and haters of Christ were so reproved and convinced
of their sin, that, upon the 386pressing urgency of that
conviction, they cried out, “Men and brethren, what shall we do to be saved?” Then was
the world brought to a voluntary confession of the sin of murdering Jesus
Christ. 2. He shall do the same of “righteousness, because he went to his Father;” — not of its
own righteousness, to reprove it for that, because it is not; but he shall
convince the men of the world, who condemned Christ as a seducer, of his
righteousness, — that he was not a blasphemer, as they pretended, but the
Son of God, as himself witnessed: which they shall be forced to acknowledge
when, by the effusion and pouring out of the Spirit upon his apostles, it
shall be made evident that he is gone to and received of his Father, and
owned by him, as the centurion did presently upon his death. 3. He shall
“convince the world of
judgment, because the prince of this world is judged;”
manifesting to all those of whom he speaketh, that he whom they despised as
the carpenter’s son, and bade come down from the cross if he could, is
exalted to the right hand of God, having all judgment committed to him,
having beforehand, in his death, judged, sentenced, and overcome Satan, the
prince of this world, the chief instigator of his crucifiers, who had the
power of death. And this I take to be the clear, genuine meaning of this
place, not excluding the efficacy of the Spirit, working in the same
manner, though not to the same degree, for the same end, in the majesty of
the word, to the end of the world. But what this is to universal
redemption, let them that can understand it keep it to themselves, for I am
confident they will never be able to make it out to others.

Proof 5. “God hath testified, both by his word and
his oath, that he would that his Son should so far save as to work a
redemption for all men, and likewise that he should bring all to the
knowledge of the truth, that there-through redemption 387might be
wrought in and upon them, 1 Tim. ii. 4,
with John iii. 17. So he willeth not, nor
hath any pleasure in, the death of him (even the wicked) that dieth, but
rather that he turn and live, Ezek.
xviii. 23, 32, xxxiii. 11. And dare any of us say, the God of
truth saith and sweareth that of which he hath no inward and serious
meaning? O far be such blasphemy from us!”

Ans. First, This assertion, “That God testifieth, by
his word and oath, that he would that Christ should so far save us,” etc.,
is a bold calling of God to witness that which he never affirmed, nor did
it ever enter into his heart; for he hath revealed his will that Christ
should save to the utmost them that come to him, and not save so far or so
far, as is boldly, ignorantly, and falsely intimated. Let men beware of
provoking God to their own confusion; he will not be a witness to the lie
of false hearts. Secondly, “That Christ should so bring all to the
knowledge of the truth, that there-through redemption might be wrought in
and upon them,” is another bold corruption of the word, and
false-witness-bearing in the name of God. Is it a small thing for you to
weary and seduce men? will you weary our God also? Thirdly, For places of
Scripture corrupted to the sense imposed: In John iii.
17, God is said to “send his Son, that the world through him might be saved;”
not be saved so far or so far, but saved “from their sins,” Matt. i.
21, and “to
the uttermost,” Heb. vii. 25:
so that the world of God’s elect, who only are so saved, is only there to
be understood, as hath been proved. In 1 Tim. ii. 4,
there is something of the will of God for the saving of all sorts of men,
as hath been declared; nothing conducing to the bold assertion used in this
place. Fourthly, To those are added that of Ezek.
xviii. 23, that God hath no “pleasure at all that the wicked should die;” and,
verse 32, “no pleasure in the death of him that
dieth.” Now, though these texts are exceeding useless to the
business in hand, and might probably have some colour of universal
vocation, but none possibly of universal redemption, there being no mention
of Christ or his death in the place from whence they are cited; yet because
our adversaries are frequently knitting knots from this place to inveigle
and hamper the simple, I shall add some few observations upon it to clear
the meaning of the text, and demonstrate how it belongs nothing at all to
the business in hand.

First, then, let us consider to whom and of whom these
words are spoken. Is it to and of all men, or only to the house of Israel?
Doubtless these last; they are only intended, they only are spoken to:
“Hear now, O house of
Israel,” verse 25.
Now, will it follow that because God saith he delights not in the death of
the house of Israel, to whom he revealed his mind, and required their
repentance and conversion, that therefore he saith so of all, even those to
whom he never revealed his will by such ways as to them, nor called to
repentance, Ps.
cxlvii. 19, 20? So that the very ground-work of the whole
conclusion is removed by this first observation. Secondly, “God willeth
not the death of a sinner,” is either, “God purposeth and determineth he
shall not die,” or, “God commandeth that he shall do those things wherein
he may live.” If the first, why are they not all saved? why do sinners
die? for there is an immutability in the counsel of God, Heb. vi. 17; “His counsel shall stand, and he will do all his
pleasure,” Isa. xlvi.
10. If the latter way, by commanding, then the sense is, that
the Lord commandeth that those whom he calleth should do their duty, that
they may not die (although he knows that this they cannot do without his
assistance); now, what this makes to general redemption, I know not.
Thirdly, To add no more, this whole place, with the scope, aim, and
intention of the prophet in it, is miserably mistaken by our adversaries,
and wrested to that whereof there is not the least thought in the text.
The 388words are a part of the answer which the Lord gives to the
repining Jews, concerning their proverb, “The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on
edge.” Now, about what did they use this proverb? Why,
“concerning the land of
Israel,” verse 2,
the land of their habitation, which was laid waste by the sword (as they
affirmed) for the sins of their fathers, themselves being innocent. So
that it is about God’s temporal judgments in overturning their land and
nation that this dispute is; wherein the Lord justifieth himself by
declaring the equity of these judgments by reason of their sins, even those
sins for which the land devoured them and spewed them out; telling them
that his justice is, that for such things they should surely die, their
blood should be upon them, verse 13,
— they shall be slain with the sword, and cut off by those judgments which
they had deserved: not that the shedding of their blood and casting out of
their carcases was a thing in itself so pleasurable or desirable to him as
that he did it only for his own will, for let them leave their
abominations, and try whether their lives were not prolonged in peace.
This being the plain, genuine scope and meaning of this place, at the first
view presenting itself to every unprejudiced man, I have often admired how
so many strange conclusions for a general purpose of showing mercy to all,
universal vocation and redemption, have been wrested from it; as also, how
it came to be produced to give colour to that heap of blasphemy which our
author calleth his fifth proof.

Ans. First, This argument, taken from the words and
phrases whereby the object of the death of Christ is in the Scripture
expressed, is that which filleth up both pages of this book, being
repeated, and most of the places here cited urged, a hundred times over;
and yet it is so far from being any pressing argument, as that indeed it is
nothing but a bare naked repetition of the thing in debate, concluding
according to his own persuasion; for the main quære389between us is, whether the
words all and the world be to be taken universally? He
saith so, and he saith so; which is all the proof we have, repeating over
the thing to be proved instead of a proof. Secondly, For those places
which affirm Christ to die for “sinners,” “ungodly,” “that which was lost,”
etc., — as Luke xix. 10; Matt. ix. 13; 1 Pet.
iii. 18; Rom. v. 6, — I have before declared how
exceedingly unserviceable they are to universal redemption. Thirdly, For
those places where the words “all,” “every man,” “the world,” “the whole
world,” are used, we have had them over and over; and they likewise have
been considered. Fourthly, For those expressions of “all nations,”
Matt.
xxviii. 19, 20, “every creature,” Mark xvi.
15, used concerning them to whom the gospel is preached, I say,
— First, That they do not comprise all individuals, nay, not all
nations at all times, much less all singular persons of all nations if we
look upon the accomplishment and fulfilling of that command; neither, de facto, was the gospel ever so
preached to all, although there be a fitness and a suitableness in the
dispensation thereof to be so preached to all, as was declared.
Secondly, The command of preaching the gospel to all doth not in the
least manner prove that Christ died with an intention to redeem all; but it
hath other grounds and other ends, as hath been manifested.
Thirdly, That the ransom belongs to all to whom it is proposed we
deny; there be other ends of that proposal; and Christ will say to some of
them that he never knew them: therefore, certainly, he did not lay down his
life for them. Fourthly, “The ends of the earth,” Isa. xlv.
22, are those that look up to God from all parts, and are saved;
which surely are not all and every one. And Christ being given to be a
“salvation unto the end of
the earth,” chap. xlix.
6, is to do no more among the Gentiles than God promiseth in the
same place that he shall do for his own people, — even “gather the preserved of Israel;” so shall
he bear forth the salvation of God, and gather the preserved remnant of his
elect to the ends of the earth.

And now, I hope, I need not mind the intelligent reader
that the author of these collections could not have invented a more ready
way for the ruin of the thesis which he seeks to maintain than by producing
those places of Scripture last recounted for the confirmation of it,
granting that all and the world are no more than
“all the ends of the
earth,” mentioned in Isa. xlv. 22, xlix.
6; it being evident beyond denial that by these expressions, in
both these places, only the elect of God and believers are clearly
intimated: so that, interpreting the one by the other, in those places
where all and the world are spoken of, those only are
intended. “If pride and error” had not taken full possession of the minds
of men, they could not so far deny their own sense and reason as to
contradict themselves and the plain texts of Scripture for the maintenance
of their false and corrupt opinions.

390Proof 7. “That whereas there are
certain high and peculiar privileges of the Spirit contained in the New
Testament, sealed by the blood of Christ, which belong not to all men, but
only to the saints, the called and chosen of the Lord, and when they are
alone distinctly mentioned, they are even so spoken of as belonging to them
only, Matt. xiii. 11; John
xiv. 17, 21–23, xvi. 13–15, xvii. 19, 20; Acts ii. 38, 39; 1 Cor. ii. 9, 14;
Heb. ix. 15, viii.;
1 Pet. ii. 3, 9; yet
many of these peculiar privileges are so spoken of as joined together with
the ransom and propitiation, which belongs to all. Then are they not
spoken of in such a restraining and exclusive manner, or with such
appropriating words, but so, and with such words, as room is left to apply
the ransom to all men, in speech; and withal, so hold out the privileges to
them that believe that are proper to them, that they may both have their
comfort and especial hope, and also hold forth the ransom and keep open the
door for others, in belief and receipt of the propitiation, to come in and
partake with them. And so it is said for his “sheep,” and for “many;” but
nowhere but only for his sheep, or but only for many: which is a strong
proof of the ransom for all men, as is shown, chap. iii., x.”

Ans. The strength of this proof, as to the business
in hand, is wholly hid from me; neither do I perceive how it may receive
any such tolerable application as to deserve the name of a proof, as to the
main thesis intended to be maintained. The force which it hath is in an
observation which, if it hath any sense, is neither true nor once attempted
to be made good; for, — First, That there are peculiar high privileges
belonging to the saints and called of God is a thing which needs no proof.
Amongst these is the death of Christ for them, not as saints, but as elect,
which, by the benefit of that death and blood-shedding, are to be made
saints, and accounted to be the holy ones of God: for “he redeemed his church with
his own blood,” Acts xx.
28; he “loved and gave himself for
it,” Eph. v. 25; even “us,” Tit. ii. 14; — even as divers of
those [privileges] here intimated are expressly assigned unto them, as
elect, such as those, John
xvii. 19, 20; amongst which also, as in the same rank with them,
is reckoned Jesus’ “sanctifying himself for their sakes,” that is to be an
oblation, verse 19. In a word, all peculiar
saving privileges belong only to God’s elect, purchased for them, and them
alone, by the blood of Jesus Christ, Eph. i. 3,
4. Secondly, For the other part of the observation, that where
mention is made of these together with the ransom, there is room left to
extend the ransom to all, I answer, — First, This is said, indeed,
but not once attempted to be proved. We have but small cause to believe
the author, in any thing of this importance, upon his bare word.
Secondly, For the “leaving of room for the application,” I perceive
that if it be not left, ye will make it, though ye justle the true sense of
the Scripture quite out 391of its place. Thirdly, I have
already showed that where “many” are mentioned, the ransom only (as ye use
to speak) is expressed, as also where “sheep” are spoken of; the like is
said where the word “all” is used; — so that there is not the least
difference. Fourthly, In divers places the ransom of Christ and
those other peculiar privileges (which indeed are fruits of it) are so
united together, as it is impossible to apply the latter to some
and the other to all, being all of them restrained to his saved
ones only, Rev. v. 9,
10. The redemption of his people by the ransom of his blood,
and their making kings and priests, are united, and no room left for the
extending of the ransom to all, it being punctually assigned to those saved
crowned ones, distinguished from the rest of the nations and languages from
among whom they were taken, who were passed by in the payment of the
ransom; which is directly opposite to all the sense which I can observe in
this observation. Fifthly, Of “sheep, and sheep only,” enough
before.

Proof 8. “The restoration wrought by Christ in his
own body for mankind is set forth in Scripture to be as large and full for
all men, and of as much force, as the fall of the first Adam, by and in
himself, for all men; in which respect the first Adam is said to have been
a figure of Christ, the second Adam, Rom.
iii. 22–25, v. 12, 14, 18; 1 Cor. xv. 21, 22,
45–47: as is before shown, chap. viii.”

Ans. First, It is most true that Christ and Adam are
compared together (in respect of the righteousness of the one, communicated
to them that are his, and the disobedience and transgression of the other,
in like manner communicated to all them that are of him) in some of the
places here mentioned, as Rom. v. 12, 18. But
evidently the comparison is not instituted between the righteousness of
Christ and the disobedience of Adam extensively, in respect of the
object, but intensively, in respect of the
efficacy of the one and the other; the apostle asserting the
effectualness of the righteousness of Christ unto justification, to answer
the prevalency of the sin of Adam unto condemnation, — that even as the
transgression of Adam brought a guilt of condemnation upon all them that
are his natural seed, so the righteousness of Christ procured the free gift
of grace unto justification towards all them that are his, his spiritual
seed, that were the children given unto him of his Father.

Secondly, 1 Cor.
xv. 21, 22, speaketh of the resurrection from the dead, and that
only of believers; for though he mentions them all, verse
22, “In Christ shall all be made alive,” yet, verse 23, he plainly interprets
those all to be all that are “Christ’s:” not but that the other dead shall rise also, but
that it is a resurrection to glory, by virtue of the resurrection of
Christ, which the apostle here treats of; which certainly all shall not
have.

Thirdly, The comparison between Christ and Adam, verse 45 (to 392speak
nothing of the various reading of that place), is only in respect of the
principles which they had, and were intrusted withal to communicate to
others: “Adam a living
soul,” or a “living creature;” there was in him a principle of
life natural, to be communicated to his posterity; — “Christ a quickening Spirit,” giving life,
grace, and spirit to his. And here I would desire that it may be observed,
that all the comparison that is anywhere instituted between Christ and Adam
still comes to one head, and aims at one thing, — namely, that they were as
two common stocks or roots, communicating to them that are ingrafted into
them (that is, into Adam naturally, by generation; into Christ
spiritually, by regeneration) that wherewith they were
replenished; — Adam, sin, guilt, and disobedience; Christ, righteousness,
peace, and justification. [As] for the number of those that do thus receive
these things from one and the other, the consideration of it is exceedingly
alien from the scope, aim, and end of the apostle in the places where the
comparison is instituted.

Fourthly, It is true, Rom. iii. 23,
it is said, “All have sinned, and come
short of the glory of God,” which the apostle had at large
proved before, thereby to manifest that there was no salvation to be
attained but only by Jesus Christ; but if ye will ask to whom this
righteousness of Christ is extended, and that redemption which is in his
blood, he telleth you plainly, it is “unto all and upon all them that believe,” verse 22, whether they be Jews or
Gentiles, “for there is no
difference.”

Proof 9. “The Lord Jesus Christ hath sent and
commanded his servants to preach the gospel to all nations, to every
creature, and to tell them withal that whoever believeth and is baptized
shall be saved, Matt.
xxviii. 19, 20; Mark
xvi. 15, 16: and his servants have so preached to all, 2 Cor. v. 19; Rom. x. 13, 18.
And our Lord Jesus Christ will make it to appear one day that he hath not
sent his servants upon a false errand, nor put a lie in their mouths, nor
wished them to dissemble, in offering that to all which they knew belonged
but to some, even to fewest of all, but to speak truth, Isa. xliv. 26, lxi.
8; 1 Tim. i. 12.”

Ans. The strength of this proof is not easily
apparent, nor manifest wherein it lieth, in what part or words of it: for,
— First, It is true, Christ commanded his apostles to “preach the gospel to all
nations and every creature,” — to tell them “that whosoever believeth
shall be saved,” Matt.
xxviii. 19, 20, Mark
xvi. 15, 16; that is, without distinction of persons or nations,
to call all men to whom the providence of God should direct them, and from
whom the Spirit of God should not withhold them (as from them, Acts xvi. 6, 7), warning them to
repent and believe the gospel. Secondly, It is also true, that, in
obedience unto this command, his servants did beseech men so to do, and to
be reconciled unto God, even all over the nations, without distinction of
any, but where they were forbidden, as above, labouring 393to
spread the gospel to the ends of the earth, and not to tie it up to the
confines of Jewry, 2 Cor. v.
19, 20; Rom. x. 18. Most certain also it is,
that the Lord Jesus Christ sent not his servants with a lie, to offer that
to all which belonged only to some, but to speak the truth; of which there
needs no proof. But now, what can be concluded from hence for universal
redemption is not easily discernible.

Perhaps some will say it is in this, that if Christ did not
die for all to whom the word is preached, then how can they that preach it
offer Christ to all? A poor proof, God wot! For, — First, The gospel was
never preached to all and every one, nor is there any such thing affirmed
in the places cited; and ye are to prove that Christ died for all, as well
those that never hear of the gospel as those that do. Secondly, What do
the preachers of the gospel offer to them to whom the word is preached? Is
it not life and salvation through Christ, upon the condition of faith and
repentance? And doth not the truth of this offer consist in this, that
every one that believeth shall be saved? And doth not that truth stand
firm and inviolable, so long as there is an all-sufficiency in Christ to
save all that come unto him? Hath God intrusted the ministers of the
gospel with his intentions, purposes, and counsels, or with his commands
and promises? Is it a lie, to tell men that he that believeth shall be
saved, though Christ did not die for some of them? Such proofs as these
had need be well proved themselves, or they will conclude the thing
intended very weakly.

Proof 10. “The Lord willeth believers to pray even
for the unjust and their persecutors, Matt. v. 44, 48;
Luke vi. 28; yea, even ‘for all men;’ yea, even ‘for kings and all in authority,’ when few
in authority loved Christianity. Yet he said not, some of that sort, but,
‘For all in
authority;’ and that on this ground, — it is good in the sight
of God, ‘who will have all men saved,
and come to the knowledge of the truth,’ Luke x. 5; 1 Tim.
ii. 1–4. Surely there is a door of life opened for all men,
2 Tim. i. 10; for God hath not said
to the seed of Israel, ‘Seek ye me in vain,’ Isa. xliv.
19. He will not have his children pray for vain things.”

Ans. The strength of this proof lieth in supposing,
— First, That indefinite assertions are to be interpreted as
equivalent to universal; which is false, Rom. iv., v. Secondly,
That by “all,” 1
Tim. ii. 1, is not meant all sorts of men, and the word
all is not to be taken distributively, when the apostle, by an
enumeration of divers sorts, gives an evident demonstration of the
distribution intended. Thirdly, That we are bound to pray for every
singular man that he may be saved; which, — 1. We have no warrant, rule,
precept, or example for; 2. It is contrary to the apostolical precept,
1 John v. 16; 3. To our Saviour’s
example, John xvii. 9; 4. To the counsel and
purpose of God, 394in the general made known to us, Rom. ix. 11,
12, 15, xi. 7, where evidently our praying for all is but for
all sorts of men, excluding none, and that those may believe who are
ordained to eternal life. Fourthly, It supposeth that there is nothing
else that we are to pray for men but that they may be saved by Christ;
which is apparently false, Jer. xxix. 7.
Fifthly, That our ground of praying for any is an assurance that Christ
died for them in particular; which is not true, Acts viii. 22, 24.
Sixthly, It most splendidly takes for granted that our duty is to be
conformed to God’s secret mind, his purpose and counsel. Until every one
of these supposals be made good, (which never a one of them will be very
suddenly), there is no help in this proof nor strength in this argument,
“We must pray for all; therefore God intends by the death of Christ to save
all and every one,” its sophistry and weakness being apparent. From our
duty to God’s purpose is no good conclusion, though from his command to our
duty be most certain.

Proof 11. “The Lord hath given forth his word and
promise to be with his servants so preaching the gospel to all, and with
his people so praying for all where they come, that they may go on with
confidence in both, Matt. xxviii.
20; 1 Tim. ii. 3,
8; Luke x. 5; Isa. liv.
17.

Ans. That God will be with his people, whether
preaching or praying, according to his will and their own duty, is as
apparent as it is that this makes nothing for universal redemption; than
which what can be more evident.

Proof 12. “The Lord hath already performed and made
good his word to his servants and people, upon some of all sorts of men and
all sorts of sinners, showing them mercy to the very end, that none might
exclude themselves, but all be encouraged to repent, believe, and hope
thereby, Acts
ii., iii., viii.–xi., xvi., xix., xxviii.; 1 Cor. vi. 10, 11; 1 Tim. i. 13–16.”

Ans. If ye had told us that God had already made
good his word to his servants, in saving all and every man, and proved it
clearly, ye had evidently and undeniably confirmed the main opinion; but
now, affirming only that he hath showed mercy to some of all sorts, and all
sorts of sinners, that others of the like sort (as are the remainder of his
elect, yet uncalled) might be induced to believe, ye have evidently
betrayed your own cause, and established that of your adversaries, showing
how the Lord in the event declareth on their side, saving in the blood of
Jesus only some of all sorts, as they affirm, not all and every one, which
your tenet leads you to.

Proof 13. “The blessing of life hath streamed in
this doctrine of the love of God to mankind; yea, in the tender and
spiritual discovery of the grace of God to mankind (in the ransom given and
atonement made by Christ for all men, with the fruits thereof) hath God, in
the 395first place, overcome his chosen ones to believe and turn
to God, Acts xiii. 48; Tit. ii.
11, 13, iii. 4, 5.”

Ans. First, That the freedom of God’s grace, and the
transcendency of his eternal love towards men, with the sending of his Son
to die for them, to recover them to himself from sin and Satan, is a most
effectual motive, and (when set on by the Spirit of grace) a most certain
operative principle of the conversion of God’s elect, we most willingly
acknowledge. It is that wherein our hearts rejoice, whereby they were
endeared, and for which we desire to return thankful obedience every
moment. But that ever this was effectual, extending this love to all, or
at least that any effectualness is in that aggravation of it, we utterly
deny; and that, — 1. Because it is false, and a corrupting of the word of
God, as hath been showed; and of a lie there can be no good consequence.
2. It quite enervates and plucks out the efficacy of this heavenly motive,
by turning the most intense and incomparable love of God towards his elect
into a common desire, wishing, and affection of his nature (which, indeed,
is opposite to his nature), failing of its end and purpose; which might
consist with the eternal destruction of all mankind, as I shall abundantly
demonstrate, if Providence call me to the other part of this controversy,
concerning the cause of sending Jesus Christ. Secondly, There is nothing
of this common love to all in the places urged; for, — 1. The “grace”
mentioned, Tit. ii.
11, 13, is the grace that certainly brings salvation, which that
common love doth not, and was the cause of sending Christ, “that he might redeem us
from all iniquity, and purify to himself a peculiar people, zealous of good
works;” where our redemption and sanctification are asserted to
be the immediate end of the oblation of Jesus Christ; which how destructive
it is to universal redemption hath been formerly declared. 2. So also is
that “love and
kindness” mentioned, chap. iii.
4, 5, such as by which we receive the “washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy
Ghost,” verse 5;
and justification, and adoption to heirship of eternal life, verse 7; — which, whether it be a
common or a peculiar love, let all men judge. 3. Acts xiii.
47 (for verse 48,
there cited, contains as clear a restriction of this love of God to his
elect, as can be desired) sets out the extent of the mercy of God in
Christ, through the preaching of the gospel to the Gentiles also, and not
only to the Jews, as was foretold by Isaiah, chap. xlix.
6; which is far enough from giving any colour to the
universality of grace, it being nothing but the same affirmation which ye
have John xi. 52, of “gathering together in one
the children of God that were scattered abroad.”

Proof 14. “Those that, when the gospel comes, and
any spiritual light therein, to them, when they refuse to believe, and
suffer themselves to be withdrawn by other things, they are affirmed to
love or choose ‘darkness rather than
light,’ John iii.
19, (which how could it 396be, if no light in truth
were for them?) in following lying vanities; to forsake their own mercies,
Jonah ii. 8; to harden their own
hearts, Rom. ii. 5; to lose their souls,
Matt. xvi. 26; and to destroy
themselves, Hos. xiii. 9. And they being from
Adam fallen into darkness, hardness, and their souls [lost], and death
passed on them, how could these things be if by Jesus Christ no life had
been attained, no atonement made, no restoration of their souls, nor means
procured and used, that they might be saved? God is no hard master, to
gather where he hath not strown.”

Ans. The sum of this argument is, That those who do
not believe upon the preaching of the gospel are the cause of their own
ruin and destruction; therefore, Jesus Christ died for all and every man in
the world. Now, though it cannot but be apprehended that it is time cast
away and labour lost, to answer such consequences as these, yet I must add
a few observations, lest any scruple should remain with the weakest reader;
as, — First, All have not the gospel preached to them, nay, from the
beginning of the world, the greatest part of men have been passed by in the
dispensation of the means of grace, Rom. ii. 14;
Acts xiv.
16, xvii. 30, — “winked at.” All these, then, must be left out in this
conclusion, which renders it altogether useless to the business in hand;
for the universality of redemption falls to the ground if any one soul be
not intended in the payment of the ransom. Secondly, It is not the
disbelieving the death of Christ for every individual soul that ever was or
shall be (which to believe is nowhere in Scripture required) that is the
cause of man’s destruction, but a not-believing in the all-sufficiency of
the passion and oblation of Jesus Christ for sinners, so as to accept of
the mercy procured thereby, upon those terms and conditions that it is held
forth in the gospel; which doth not attend the purpose and intention of God
for whom Christ should die, but the sufficiency and efficacy of his death
for all that receive him in a due manner, he being the only true way, life,
and light, no other name being given under heaven whereby men may be saved.
It is a “loving darkness rather than
light,” as in John iii.
19, the place urged in the proof; which word μᾶλλον, “rather,” there, doth not institute a comparison between
their love of darkness and light, as though they loved both, but darkness
chiefly; but plainly intimates an opposition unto the love of light by a
full love of darkness. And this “men” are said to do; which being spoken indefinitely,
according to the rules of interpreting Scripture followed by this author,
should be taken universally, for all men: but we are contented that it be
the most of those men to whom Christ preached; for some also of them
“received him,” to
whom he “gave this privilege, that
they should become the sons of God,” John i.
12.

Why ye should interpret “love” here by “choose,” as though
either the words were equivalent, or the word in the original would signify
397either, I can see no reason, for both these are exceeding
false. There is a difference between loving and choosing; and as for ἠμάπησαν, he would be as bad a translator as
ye are an interpreter that should render it “they choose.” Now, what is
this loving of darkness more than light, but a following and cleaving in
affection and practice to the ways wherein they were, being alienated from
the life of God, labouring in the unfruitful works of darkness, and
refusing to embrace the heavenly doctrine of the gospel, holding forth
peace and reconciliation with God through Christ, with life and immortality
thereby. To conclude from hence, [that] therefore Christ died for all and
every man in the world, because the greatest part of them to whom he
preached the gospel did not believe, is a wild kind of reasoning; much
better may we infer, that therefore he died not for all men, because it is
not “given unto them, for his
sake, to believe on him,” Phil. i.
29.

Neither will that parenthesis — “Which how could it be, if
no light in truth were for them?” — give any light to the former inference;
for if the word “for” should denote the intention and purpose of God, the
truth is, we dare not say that God intends and purposeth that they should
receive light who do not, lest by so saying we should make the Strength of
Israel to be like to ourselves, and contradict him who hath said,
“My counsel shall stand,
and I will do all my pleasure,” Isa. xlvi.
10. “The counsel of the Lord
standeth for ever,” Ps. xxxiii.
11; he being “the
Lord, and changing
not,” Mal. iii. 6; James i.
17; 2 Tim. ii. 19; Rom. ix. 11. If by “for them,” ye
mean such a stock and fulness of light and grace as there is of light in
the sun for all the men in the world, though some be blind and cannot see
it, then we say that such a light there is for all in the gospel to whom it
is preached, and their own blindness is the sole cause of their not
receiving it: so that this hath not got the stone a step forward, which
still rolls back upon him.

Thirdly, The other scriptures urged have not so much as any
colour that should give advantage to consider them, as with any reference
to the business in hand. That of Jonah ii. 8
is concerning such as forsake the true God to follow idols, so forfeiting
the mercies, temporal and spiritual, which from the true God they had
before received. Rom. ii. 5 speaks of the Gentiles who
had the works of God to teach them, and the patience of God to wait upon
them, yet made no other use of them both than, by vile rebellions, to add
new degrees of farther hardness upon their own hearts. That of men’s
losing their souls, Matt. xvi.
26, and destroying themselves (Hos. xiii. 9)
by sin, is of equal force with what went before.

But, fourthly, The close of this reason seems to intimate a
farther view of the author, which at the first view doth not appear, —
namely, that all men are in a restored condition by Christ; not a door of
398mercy opened for them all, but that they are all actually
restored into grace and favour, from which if they do not fall, they shall
surely be saved. And the argument whereby he proves this is, because,
being lost in Adam, they could not be said to lose themselves unless they
were restored by Christ; being darkness and hardness in him, unless all
were enlightened and mollified by Christ, they could not be said to love
darkness nor to harden themselves. Now, if this be his intention (as it is
too apparent that so it is), I must say something, — first, To the
argument; secondly, To the thing itself. And, —

First, For the argument, it is this:— Because by
original sin men are guilty of death and damnation, therefore they cannot
by actual sins make sure of and aggravate that condemnation, and so bring
upon themselves a death unto death: or, Because there is a native, inbred
hardness of heart in man, therefore, none can add farther degrees of
contracted hardness and induration by actual rebellions; that because men
are blind, therefore they cannot undervalue light (when indeed the reason
why they do so is because they are blind); that men who have time, and
opportunity, and means, to save their souls, cannot be said to lose them,
that is, to be condemned, unless their souls were in a saved condition
before. Now, this is one of the proofs which, in the close, is called
“plain, and according to Scripture;” when, indeed, nothing can be more
contrary to reason, Scripture, and the principles of the oracles of God,
than this and some other of them are. I shall add no more, knowing that no
reader can be so weak as to conceive that the refusing of a proposed
remedy, accompanied with infinite other despites done to the Lord, is not
sufficient to make men guilty of their own condemnation. I speak of those
that enjoy the preaching of the gospel.

Secondly, For the thing itself, or an actual
restoration of all men by Christ into such a state (as is intimated) as
they had at the first in Adam (I mean in respect of covenant, not
innocency), which I take to be the meaning of the author, and that because
in another place he positively affirms that it is so, and that all are
justified by Christ, though how it should be so he is not able to declare.
To this, then, I say, — 1. That there is nothing in the Scripture that
should give the least colour to this gross error, nor can any thing be
produced so much as probably sounding that way. 2. It is contrary, — (1.)
To very many places, affirming that we are “dead in
trespasses and sins,” Eph. ii. 1;
that “except we be born again, we
cannot see the kingdom of God,” John iii. 3;
that until we come by faith to Christ, “the wrath of God abideth on us,” chap. iii.
36; with those innumerable places which discover the universal
alienation of all men from God, until actual peace and reconciliation be
made through Christ. (2.) To the very nature and essence of the 399new covenant of grace, proceeding from the free mercy of God to
his elect, carried along with distinguishing promises from the first to the
last of them, putting a difference between the seed of the woman and the
seed of the serpent, as well in the members as in the Head; being effective
and really working every good thing it promised in and towards all to whom
it doth belong (which certainly it doth not in all), and being everywhere
said to be made with the people of God, or those whom he will own, in
opposition to the world; — of all which, and divers other things, so
plentifully affirmed of it in the Scripture, not one can be true if all men
receive a restoration by Christ into covenant. (3.) To the eternal purpose
of God in election and reprobation; of which the latter is a resolution to
leave men in their fallen condition, without any reparation by Christ.
(4.) It is attended with very many strange, absurd, groundless
consequences; as, —

[1.] That all infants dying before they come to the use of
reason and the committing of actual sin must necessarily be saved (although
our Saviour hath said, that “except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of
God,” John iii. 3; and Paul from him, that
the children of infidels are “unclean,” 1 Cor. vii.
14; — now no unclean thing shall enter the new Jerusalem,
Rev. xxi. 27), whereby the infants of
Turks, Pagans, infidels, persecutors, are placed in a far more happy
condition than the apostles of Christ, if they depart in their infancy, —
than the best of believers, who are not, according to the authors of this
doctrine, out of danger of eternal perishing. [2.] That there is no more
required of any to be saved than a continuance in the estate wherein he was
born (that is, in covenant, actually restored by Christ thereunto), when
the whole word of God crieth out that all such as so abide shall certainly
perish everlastingly. [3.] That every one that perisheth in the whole
world falls away from the grace of the new covenant, though the promises
thereof are, that there shall never be any total falling away of them that
are in covenant. [4.] That none can come unto Christ but such as have in
their own persons fallen from him, for all others abide in him.

Innumerable other such consequences as these do necessarily
attend this false, heretical assertion, that is so absolutely destructive
to the free grace of God. I doubt not but that such proofs as these will
make considering men farther search into the matter intended to be proved,
and yield them good advantages to discover the wretched lie of the
whole.

Fifthly, To the last words of the proof I answer, that God
sowed that seed in Adam, and watered it with innumerable temporal blessings
towards all, and spiritual in some, whose fruit he will come to require
from the world of unbelievers, and not in the blood of Jesus 400Christ, any farther than as it hath been certainly proposed to
some of them and despised.

Proof 15. “God’s earnest expostulations,
contendings, charges, and protestations, even to such as whereof many
perished, Rom. ix. 27; Isa. x.
22. As, to instance:— ‘O
that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear
me,’ etc., ‘that it might be well with them!’ Deut. v.
29. ‘What could have been done more
to my vineyard, that I have not done in it?’ etc., Isa. v. 4, 5. ‘What iniquity have your fathers found in me, that they are gone far from
me?’ Jer. ii. 5. ‘Have I been a wilderness unto Israel? a land of darkness? wherefore say
my people, We are lords; we will come no more unto thee?’
verse 31. ‘O my people, what have I done unto thee? wherein have I wearied thee?
testify against me,’ Mic. vi. 3.
‘How often would I have
gathered,’ etc., ‘and ye would not!’ Matt. xxiii.
37. ‘O that my people had
hearkened unto me!’ etc., ‘I
should soon have subdued their enemies,’ etc., Ps. lxxxi. 13, 14. ‘Because I have called, and ye refused; I have stretched
out my hand, and no man regarded,’ etc., Prov. i. 24–31. ‘Because, when they knew God, they glorified him not as
God,’ etc., Rom. i. 21, 28.
‘Therefore thou art inexcusable,
O man,’ etc., ‘Thou,
after thy hardness and impenitent heart, treasurest up unto thyself
wrath,’ etc., Rom. ii. 1, 5. No
Christian, I hope, will reply against God, and say, ‘Thou never meantest us
good; there was no ransom given for us, no atonement made for us, no good
done us, no mercy shown us, — nothing, in truth, whereby we might have been
saved, nothing but an empty show, a bare pretence.’ But if any should
reason so evilly, yet shall not such answers stand.”

Ans. To this collection of expostulations I shall
very briefly answer with some few observations, manifesting of how little
use it is to the business in hand; as, — First, That in all these
expostulations there is no mention of any ransom given or atonement made
for them that perish (which is the thing pretended in the close), but they
are all about temporal mercies, with the outward means of grace. To which
[add] what we observed in the argument last foregoing, — namely, that as
God doth not expostulate with them about it, no more shall they with God
about it at the last day. Not that I deny that there is sufficient matter
of expostulation with sinners about the blood of Christ and the ransom paid
thereby, that so the elect may be drawn and wrought upon to faith and
repentance, and believers more and more endeared to forsake all ungodliness
and worldly lusts, to live unto him who died for them, and that others may
be left more inexcusable; only for the present there are no such
expostulations here expressed, nor can any be found holding out the purpose
and intention of God in Christ towards them that perish. Secondly, That
all these places urged (excepting only those of Rom. i. 28, ii. 5,
which apparently and evidently lay the inexcusableness of sin upon 401that knowledge which they might have had, by the works of creation
and providence, of God, as eternal, almighty, and powerful, without the
least intimation of any ransom, atonement, and redemption), — that all the
rest, I say, are spoken to and of those that enjoyed the means of grace,
who, in the days wherein those expostulations were used towards them, were
a very small portion of all men; so that from what is said to them nothing
can be concluded of the mind and purpose of God towards all others,
Ps. cxlvii. 19, 20, — which is
destructive to the general ransom. Thirdly, That there are no men,
especially none of those that enjoy the means of grace, but do receive so
many mercies from God, as that he may justly plead with them about their
unthankfulness and not returning of obedience proportionable to the mercies
and light which they received. Fourthly, It is confessed, I hope by all,
that there are none of those things for the want whereof God expostulateth
with the sons of men, but that he could, if it so seemed good before him,
effectually work them in their hearts, at least, by the exceeding greatness
of his power: so that these things cannot be declarative of his purpose,
which he might, if he pleased, fulfil; “for
who hath resisted his will,” Rom. ix. 19.
Fifthly, That desires and wishings should properly be ascribed unto God is
exceedingly opposite to his all-sufficiency and the perfection of his
nature; they are no more in him than he hath eyes, ears, and hands. These
things are to be understood θεοπρεπῶς.
Sixthly, It is evident that all these are nothing but pathetical
declarations of our duty in the enjoyment of the means of grace, strong
convictions of the stubborn and disobedient, with a full justification of
the excellency of God’s ways to draw us to the performance of our duties;
ergo, Christ died for all
men, ὅπερ ἔδει δείξαι. Seventhly,
Some particular places, that seem to be of more weight than the rest, have
been already examined.

Proof 16. “The Scripture’s manner of setting forth
the sin of such as despise and refuse this grace, and their estate, and the
persons perishing; as to say they ‘turn the
grace of God into wantonness,’ Jude 4;
‘tread under foot the Son of
God, profane the blood of the covenant, with which they were sanctified,
offer despite to the Spirit of grace,’ Heb. x.
29; ‘deny the Lord that bought
them,’ 2 Pet. ii. 1;
‘they perish for whom
Christ died,’ 1 Cor. viii.
11; ‘trees twice dead, plucked up by
the roots,’ Jude 12,
13; ‘and bring upon themselves
swift destruction,’ 2 Pet. ii. 1.
And how could all this be if God had given his Son in no sort for them? if
Christ had shed no blood to procure remission for them? if he had not
bought them, nor had any grace or life by his Spirit to bestow on
them?”

Ans. First, There are in this proof three places of
Scripture which are frequently urged in this cause, — namely, Heb. x. 29; 2 Pet. ii.
1; 1 Cor. viii. 11: and, therefore, they
have been considered already 402apart at large; where it was
evidenced that they no way incline to the assertion of that whereunto they
are violently wrested, and their sense for that end perverted. Secondly,
For those other places out of Jude 4, 12, 13, I
cannot perceive how they can be hooked into the business in hand. Some are
said, verse 4, to “turn
the grace of God into wantonness,” — that is, to abuse the
doctrine of the gospel and the mercy of God revealed thereby, to encourage
themselves in sin; whence to conclude that therefore Jesus Christ died for
all men is an uncouth inference, especially the apostle intimating that he
died not for these abusers of his grace, affirming that they were
“before of old ordained to
condemnation;” which ordination standeth in direct opposition
to that love which moved the Lord to send his Son Christ to procure the
salvation of any. The strength of the proof lieth in the other places,
which have been already considered.

Proof 17. “Jesus Christ, by virtue of his death,
shall be their judge, and by the gospel, in which they might have been
saved, will he judge them to a second death; and how can that be, if he
never died the first death for them, and if there were not truth in his
gospel preached to them? Rom. xiv.
9–12; Phil. ii.
7–11; Rom. ii. 16; John xii. 47, 48,
50.”

Ans. First, That Jesus Christ shall be judge of all,
and that all judgment is already committed to him, is confessed: that it
doth not hence follow that he died for all hath been already declared,
unless ye will affirm that he died for the devils also, because they also
must be judged by him. Secondly, That all shall be judged by the gospel,
even such as never heard word of it, is directly contrary to the gospel:
“For as many as have sinned
without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in
the law shall be judged by the law,” Rom. ii.
12. Every man, doubtless, shall be judged according to the
light and rule which he did or might have enjoyed, and not according to
that whereof he was invincibly deprived. Thirdly, That Christ should be
said to die only the first death is neither an expression of the word, nor
can be collected from thence; he died the death which was in the curse of
the law: but of this only by the way. Fourthly, Ye intimate as though
there were no truth in the gospel preached unless Christ died for all, when
indeed there is no assertion more opposite to the truth of the gospel. The
places urged mention Christ being Lord of all, exalted above all, being
Judge of all, judging men according to the gospel, — that is, those men who
enjoy it; but how they may be wrested to the end proposed I know not.

Proof 18. “Believers are exhorted to contend for the
faith of this common salvation, which was once delivered to the saints;
which some having heard oppose, and others turn the offers of it into
wantonness, and, through not heeding and not walking in the faith of 403this salvation, already wrought by Christ for men, they deprive
themselves of, and wind out themselves from, that salvation, which Christ
by his Spirit, in application of the former, hath wrought in them, and so
deprive themselves of the salvation to come, Jude
3–5.

“And every [one] of these proofs be plain and according to
Scripture, and each of force, how much more altogether! — still justifying
the sense that 1 Tim. ii. 6 and Heb.
ii. 9 importeth, and the truth of the proposition in the
beginning.”

Ans. I can see nothing in this proof, but only that
the salvation purchased by Christ is called “common
salvation;” which if ye conclude from thence to be common to
all, ye may as well conclude so of faith that it belongs to all, because it
is called the “common faith,”
Tit. i. 4, though termed the
“faith of God’s
elect,” verse 1. Doubtless there is a
community of believers, and that is common amongst them which is extended
to the whole church of God; there is totus mundus ex toto mundo; and that common
salvation is that whereby they are all saved, without any colour of that
strange common salvation whereby no one is saved, maintained by this
disputer. The remainder of this proof is a fulness of words, suitable to
the persuasion of the author, but in no small part of them exceedingly
unsuitable to the word of God and derogatory to the merits of Christ,
making the salvation purchased by him to be in itself of no effect, but
left to the will of sinful, corrupted, accursed men, to make available or
to reject.

And these are the proofs which this author calls
“plain and according to Scripture,” being a recapitulation of
almost all that he hath said in his whole book; at least, for the
argumentative part thereof, there is not any thing of weight omitted: and
therefore this chapter I fixed on to return a full and punctual answer
unto. Now, whether the thing intended to be proved, namely, The paying
of a ransom by Christ for all and every man, be plainly, clearly, and
evidently from the Scripture confirmed, as he would bear us
in hand; or whether all this heap of words, called arguments, reasons, and
proofs, be not, for their manner of expression, obscure, uncouth, and
ofttimes unintelligible, — for their way of inference, childish, weak, and
ridiculous, — in their allegations and interpretations of Scripture,
perverse, violent, mistaken, through ignorance, heedlessness, and
corruption of judgment, in direct opposition to the mind and will of God
revealed therein, — is left to the judgment of the Christian reader that
shall peruse them, with the answers annexed.